Re: the nature of

Hello Nik,

In your letter (3.nov) you wrote about p12 of B&T. You asked if we
could make open groups: on the one hand: ontological, authentic,
existential and ontic, inauthentic, existentiell. I think that is for
the reading of B&T the right way. What I wanted to say is that there
must be a *bridge* over the two groups and the bridge is, that we have
to (Heidegger says "ergreifen") do the analytic way and this way is
only possible in the existentiell modus. The presupposition of the
ontological analytic is the existentiell "ergreifen" of the analytic.
(p13: the ontological analytic is rooted ontic). This is important for
chapter two, because the potentiality-for-Being-a-whole we could only
*be* existentiell. This possibility *is* when there is no difference
between the ontological (existential) structure and the existentiell
executation of the existentials. This is "Entschlossenheit"
(resolutness, un-locking).

I hope it clear it up what I meant.

Christian

Christian Lotz
chrlotz@xxxxxxx


--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---


Partial thread listing: